If it's an actual job where a paycheck is involved agreed, it isn't. If it's Nazi Calvinist bullshiat as described in TFA, there's little difference.

Working to get food/water is nazi Calvinist bullshiat? America was founded by people putting in work from dawn till dusk just to provide food/water for their family. Your logic is what is wrong with America, for some reason people think they are entitled to more than they are for simply existing. I'm sorry, but walking around in the street picking up trash for 15min does not get you a paycheck. Food and water is actually pretty generous

Actually, America was founded by slaves putting work from dawn till dusk just to provide riches to someone else's family. Seriously. We've had slavery and indentured servitude as the basis of our wealth for at least 60% of this country's history - look it up. This country was built on the backs of First Nations folks, slaves from Central and South America, slaves from Africa, immigrants from pretty much every friggin' country on the planet, indentured servants, even child workers.

Much of the agitation against unions, against pensions, against social supports, comes from the very same mindset you're espousing - and was espoused throughout this country's history. We've been fortunate, in that folks like Lincoln, Eisenhower, Roosevelt, and others understood that the whole point of society is to ensure that, from a social & financial perspective, the bottom continues to rise even as the top does so.

We've taken a huge step backward from that in the last three decades or so. We've unraveled social supports, destroyed unions, and erode the very concept of retirement (except for the rich, of course.) We continue to take money, time, and resources from the poor and hand them over to the rich in increasing volume and speed, even as the infrastructure we spent the last century constructing during WWI, both New Deals, and WWII falls apart. Bridges, roads, dams, and other public works crumble. Social supports are slowly destroyed, robbed by the rich and reviled by the clueless.

FTA:City officials say the restriction is nothing new, and that Bread of Life simply operated in the park for three years without being caught or reported.

Yep, they've been doing this for three years without any sort of problems, right next door to the Sheriff's office and the courthouse, where there are always cops, so if anything was going wrong, it would have been noticed.

I'd like to offer a big, hearty, steaming bowl of Fark You, with a side of KITBASH to the city officials who did this. People are hungry, and other people want to feed them. Stopping this solves absolutely zero problems and creates new ones that we don't need.

I had a great idea for city cleaning. Corvids (crows, ravens, jays) are extremely intelligent. And hungry much of the time. Set up special dispensers that drop out set amounts of seed, corn, peanuts, watever when garbage items are dropped in the top and catch and train a few crows to do this. Then release the birds.Within a few weeks every crow in the city will have learned from the others, and within a couple months if you tosses a Tim Horton's cup from a moving car it would never hit the ground before something large and feathery swooped in to catch it. And the city would have a cleanup crew- or cleanup crows- that literally would work for peanuts.

Takami said those wishing to feed the homeless need to coordinate with the Operation: Sack Lunch program, which serves up to 300 people a day at the city's outdoor meal site, located under the I-5 bridge at 6th Avenue and Columbia Street.

Wikipedia: Estimates of Seattle's homeless population put the number somewhere around 6,000 to 8,000 people; up to 1,000 are children and young adults.

clowncar on fire:I have at least 3 more similar tales in my resume. The fact is- some people will never attempt to care for themselves as long as others will foot the bill.

Yeah, this. Also BronyMedic's.

Look, nobody is going to ever be able to question my liberal credentials. And I have been on the bottom of the heap oftener than I'd like to remember and dependent on the kindness of strangers. That said, I know from my very own experience that the people who are down & out through no fault of their own usually don't stay there very long. They want work and they will find something and keep it no matter how much they hate it and no matter how long it takes to find something. The ones who don't either have some kind of serious mental or substance abuse issues and WOULD work if they could get help--and thanks to our society, they cannot--or they are "friends" like yours and just don't want to. Possibly they have some deeper psychological issues as well, but that's beyond my area of expertise.

I also know that institutionalization is a very real effect, and people with minor mental problems fall victim to it easily. Someone who is already depressed or has paranoia doesn't need someone telling him 'There there, you don't need to work or try hard, we'll take care of everything for you, here's your food and clothes you poor dear," they need someone to give them something to do. They need--surprise!--to work. Not to LOOK for work, which may be beyond them at this point, but for someone to say Here is work for you to do, go do it.

Maybe it's time to stop treating everyone like they are helpless. Maybe we need to treat them like they are capable of being helped.

Allen. The end.:I was very nearly homeless in Seattle, and it's GREAT if you can play by the rules. I had secure apartment at Pike and Broadway (above Tango!) for $600 a month (unheard of in downtown), and since I was a student, they paid for tuition, books, bus pass, and part of my food and rent. I got my degree and a decent job...but SOCILAISM!!!! Anytime I hear that word I want to pull out my last paycheck and say "here, here's what it does!!"

Holy shiat, so much this.

Dig the holes, laugh when they fall in, and then refuse to provide a ladder, claiming that if they wanted out badly enough, they would figure out a way.

That's not society. That's not civilization. That's the antithesis of civilization - that's what barbarians do.

Nobody's stopping anybody from feeding the homeless, they're just asking them to refrain from doing it on public property in the middle of a city park.

There are numerous health, safety and social service reasons for wanting the mission to serve their food in more appropriate and sanitary locations, instead of in the middle of a public square, especially now that the homeless population has soared to the extent that their use of this public space crowds out everyone else when it occurs.

I'm surprised at the over-reactions here on Fa..., oh wait, no I'm not.

If it's an actual job where a paycheck is involved agreed, it isn't. If it's Nazi Calvinist bullshiat as described in TFA, there's little difference.

Working to get food/water is nazi Calvinist bullshiat? America was founded by people putting in work from dawn till dusk just to provide food/water for their family. Your logic is what is wrong with America, for some reason people think they are entitled to more than they are for simply existing. I'm sorry, but walking around in the street picking up trash for 15min does not get you a paycheck. Food and water is actually pretty generous

Then I'm sure you would have no problem with giving the people in question an actual job, complete with benefits and decent wages. I'm guessing no, that concept probably makes you rage.

Ya know how I know neither one of you read the article? I'll save you the trouble. There was no mention of homeless people having to pick up trash in exchange for food. Subby just threw that in, YHBT

If it's an actual job where a paycheck is involved agreed, it isn't. If it's Nazi Calvinist bullshiat as described in TFA, there's little difference.

Working to get food/water is nazi Calvinist bullshiat? America was founded by people putting in work from dawn till dusk just to provide food/water for their family. Your logic is what is wrong with America, for some reason people think they are entitled to more than they are for simply existing. I'm sorry, but walking around in the street picking up trash for 15min does not get you a paycheck. Food and water is actually pretty generous

Then I'm sure you would have no problem with giving the people in question an actual job, complete with benefits and decent wages. I'm guessing no, that concept probably makes you rage.

If it's an actual job where a paycheck is involved agreed, it isn't. If it's Nazi Calvinist bullshiat as described in TFA, there's little difference.

Working to get food/water is nazi Calvinist bullshiat? America was founded by people putting in work from dawn till dusk just to provide food/water for their family. Your logic is what is wrong with America, for some reason people think they are entitled to more than they are for simply existing. I'm sorry, but walking around in the street picking up trash for 15min does not get you a paycheck. Food and water is actually pretty generous

Methinks the city of Seattle is just angry that the mission is cutting into their federal money for feeding the homeless (the more homeless the city itself feeds, the more federal money they get for doing so).

You mean the reality that there are people out there who have built their lives on scamming and taking advantage of the altruism of others, and who use shaming tactics and appeals to emotion to silence people who would criticize those behaviors? People that, even if EVERY facet of American society were built to cater to their needs to rise above their current socioeconomic problems - free mental health, job/housing/education placement - would still game the system and the people around them?

I'm glad the world you live in is such Sunshine and Rainbows, and anything questioning it is Fox News Propaganda. Meanwhile, the rest of us will live in the real world, where there actually ARE people who live their lives like that, and - I know this is a difficult concept for you to grasp - take advantage of the altruism of society as a whole to continue to enable them to do so.

What system do you propose that enables us to instantly identify those who truly are gaming the system vs. those who need it? This is why pointing to so-called "welfare queens" as an argument for dismantling assistance is retarded. Sure, she exists. But you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater just to stick it to a percentage of useless people. I'm not saying that's what you're proposing; just that lots of people do.

I live in a major city with more than our share of homeless assholes. But for every asshole making himself visible (extremely aggressive panhandling, for starters), there are untold people who either got farked over or are physically/mentally unable to function in society.

whidbey:Gyrfalcon: Dude, you keep on about slavery. Slavery is involuntary forced servitude. If the homeless person agrees to the terms and conditions and is free to walk away any time with no repercussions, it's not slavery. If the mission says "here's your broom, when the sidewalk is clean come get your meal" and HP says "screw you" and walks off; or says "OK", starts to sweep and then leaves the broom at the end of the block, it's not slavery. It's a contract.

If I were homeless, I would have no problem going along with whatever work they wanted me to do.

But some either can't or won't, and there is no reason to make somebody jump through a hoop just to get food. Methinks you are a bit too privileged.

The ones who can't or won't....probably wouldn't be there.

You've got some of your wires crossed here, methinks. There are, after all, several kinds of homeless people after all. There are those who would rather work than just receive handouts, but can't get work because by this point they're too beat down or smelly or been off the payrolls too long. These folks would LOVE the chance to give back in exchange for whatever they get, and maybe a job reference or work experience thrown in.

Then there are those, a smaller number, who can't, due to mental or physical disability, age or infirmity. Nobody has a problem with giving these folks food and money to live on; although it would be better for them psychologically to do something in exchange for their benefits. If only because sitting around doing nothing is bad for you. But the truly disabled shouldn't be required to work if they cannot; but the truly disabled won't be the ones showing up to soup kitchens, because they probably can't.

Finally, there is the tiny minority of people who won't work. There aren't many of these, but there are some chronic malingerers who would rather mooch off free sandwiches and coffee and sit around. I'm sorry, but they shouldn't get squat. You can disagree if you like, but the able-bodied and able-minded who would rather not use either don't deserve freebies. Happily, there are very few genuine leeches among us.

Where this idea came from that "nobody should have to jump through hoops" to get a meal, I don't know. I mean, it would be lovely if NOBODY had to jump through hoops to get a meal, but sadly, everyone else does. We have to get some kind of job, or marry someone who does, or do something to put food on the table. Why is being homeless and down on one's luck suddenly a free pass to having to work? Plus, it's psychologically very bad for the recipient, what psychologists call "infantilizing." It makes the person feel like a child to have someone else hand them the necessities of life without requiring them to do anything for them and then send them on their way. "Here's your dinner, now go off and don't bother us."

In fact, this would be an excellent way to quickly sort the wheat from the chaff: The ones who want to and are willing to work could be easily located by finding out who was anxious to sweep the front walkway for a meal, who was unable to do so because of mental disability or physical infirmity, and who said "Are you crazy? What's in it for me?" The former can be sent on to job placement after dinner, the second to social services, and the latter given a kick in the ass. But you can't treat everyone like disabled children because SOME of them are. Or you can, but then you can't be surprised when they all start acting like it.

BronyMedic:The A.I.S.B.: Yes, the homeless are all poor just because they are lazy! It can't be anything to do with the poor availability of mental care, and they couldn't possibly have disabilities prohibiting them from finding employment!!! And of course, every single business is just chomping at the bit to hire people with no houses, places to bathe, or proper clothing, that are likely clinically insane and uneducated! It's not like we're in an economic recession with scarce jobs or anything!

\you people disgust me.

You do realize that the city of Seattle has entire programs dedicated to helping the homeless through offering them jobs, tuition and financial aid support, and housing placement, right?

God forbid we offer people who are "homeless" jobs to help them rise above their current socioeconomic state. I mean, they MIGHT have to pick up trash or something. That's not American work for entitled white folks! That's foreign taco-jockey work or something. Or other indignant right wing furious commentary you would like to make.

God forbid someone have to do manual labor instead of set behind a computer all day and debate on FARK. Inhumane, I tells you!

/it's a disgusting attitude to label ALL homeless people as non-compliant mentally ill (on average only 1/4 - 1/2 of the homeless population are), and then act offended that someone MIGHT offer them the opportunity to work in exchange for benefits to allow them to rise above their current plight. Drug rehab programs and free/reduced cost mental health programs would go a LONG way to solving the homeless problem, but it's not the only quick fix.//The solution is neither forced manual labor, nor handouts. Stop pretending like one spectrum or the other will be the solution.

The A.I.S.B.:Yes, the homeless are all poor just because they are lazy! It can't be anything to do with the poor availability of mental care, and they couldn't possibly have disabilities prohibiting them from finding employment!!! And of course, every single business is just chomping at the bit to hire people with no houses, places to bathe, or proper clothing, that are likely clinically insane and uneducated! It's not like we're in an economic recession with scarce jobs or anything!

\you people disgust me.

You do realize that the city of Seattle has entire programs dedicated to helping the homeless through offering them jobs, tuition and financial aid support, and housing placement, right?

God forbid we offer people who are "homeless" jobs to help them rise above their current socioeconomic state. I mean, they MIGHT have to pick up trash or something. That's not American work for entitled white folks! That's foreign taco-jockey work or something. Or other indignant right wing furious commentary you would like to make.

God forbid someone have to do manual labor instead of set behind a computer all day and debate on FARK. Inhumane, I tells you!

/it's a disgusting attitude to label ALL homeless people as non-compliant mentally ill (on average only 1/4 - 1/2 of the homeless population are), and then act offended that someone MIGHT offer them the opportunity to work in exchange for benefits to allow them to rise above their current plight. Drug rehab programs and free/reduced cost mental health programs would go a LONG way to solving the homeless problem, but it's not the only quick fix.//The solution is neither forced manual labor, nor handouts. Stop pretending like one spectrum or the other will be the solution.

Yes, the homeless are all poor just because they are lazy! It can't be anything to do with the poor availability of mental care, and they couldn't possibly have disabilities prohibiting them from finding employment!!! And of course, every single business is just chomping at the bit to hire people with no houses, places to bathe, or proper clothing, that are likely clinically insane and uneducated! It's not like we're in an economic recession with scarce jobs or anything!

Superjew:Nobody's stopping anybody from feeding the homeless, they're just asking them to refrain from doing it on public property in the middle of a city park.

There are numerous health, safety and social service reasons for wanting the mission to serve their food in more appropriate and sanitary locations, instead of in the middle of a public square, especially now that the homeless population has soared to the extent that their use of this public space crowds out everyone else when it occurs.

I'm surprised at the over-reactions here on Fa..., oh wait, no I'm not.

Carry on.

Think of all the awful horrible things that can happen when volunteers carry food onto public property. MY GOD THERE'S A PIECE OF LETTUCE. ON THE GROUND.

If they were bringing guns so the homeless could defend themselves from runaway gubmint, it would be different.

I was very nearly homeless in Seattle, and it's GREAT if you can play by the rules. I had secure apartment at Pike and Broadway (above Tango!) for $600 a month (unheard of in downtown), and since I was a student, they paid for tuition, books, bus pass, and part of my food and rent. I got my degree and a decent job...but SOCILAISM!!!! Anytime I hear that word I want to pull out my last paycheck and say "here, here's what it does!!"